ࡱ> SUR dEbjbj΀ 4\<~**mmmmm8$</(WWW222FHHHHHH!'$dHm22222HmmWW]2mWmWF2F:,VWPw= 2s0R$$V$mV2222222HHj2222222$222222222* 3: Distance Education Committee Written Report February 25, 2011 The following was distributed by John Newman, chairman of the Distance Education Committee, via email from the Winnemucca campus to all committee members. Distance Education Memebers: Susanne Bentley, Bob Byram, Jim Elithorp, Lisa Frazier, Robert Hannu, Thomas Matula, Russ Orr, Stephen Theriault, John Newman Hello all, The topic of IAV recordings of classes is being brought up in department chairs meetings (see meeting minutes for Dec. 3, 2010). This issue is something that the Distance Education committee may want to review, comment on, and/or recommend the formulation of policy for GBC. GBC classrooms have the capability to record any IAV class for use to supply students with course content in the event of technology problems that may arise at off sites (recall last years problem at the Pahrump campus with a cut transmission line). GBC does have an IAV Handbook for both faculty and students ( HYPERLINK "http://www.gbcnv.edu/distance/IAV_Faculty_Handbook.pdf" http://www.gbcnv.edu/distance/IAV_Faculty_Handbook.pdf ) Current policy states that recordings of classes are not to be distributed to students unless there is a technical difficulty or specifically requested by the instructor (page 13). To make a long story short, this issue has opened a wide range of questions, both professional and legal. In discussion with IAV director Bob Hannu it seems that this is a literal Pandoras box of issues. Everything from student consent for allowing their image to be used to students taking copies of recordings and making them public on such websites as YouTube to instructors use of class recordings for online courses. State and federal laws about video recordings also come to play in this issue. NSHE legal counsel has been consulted about this issue and has commented on certain NSHE and NRS codes. I would ask the Distance Education Committee to review the attached materials and discuss this issue with members of your department and colleagues about this. A policy does need to be put in place. However, it must be a policy that will support the goals and mission of GBC to provide superior, student-centered, post-secondary education in rural Nevada. I will be calling a meeting during March to bring this item up for discussion and perhaps presentation to the faculty senate. In the meantime please feel free to open a dialogue with committee member to see where we are and where we want to go with this. This memo will be submitted to the faculty senate as a written report for the February 25, 2011 faulty senate meeting. Respectfully submitted, John Newman - Distance Education Chair Department Chairs Meeting Minutes December 3, 2010 Battle Mountain - #4; Elko- EIT #203; Ely - #118; Pahrump PVC #122; Winnemucca - #202 Began: 9:35 Present: B. Hofland, P. Bagley, N. Cavanaugh, F. Daniels, A. deBraga, D. Ellefsen, P. Fox, D. Freistroffer, D. Gonzales, T. Matula, C. Mitchel, B. Moss, E. Nickel, M. Swetich, L. Uhlenkott, D. Wrightman Absent: L. Campbell, A. Donnelli, M. Doucette, X. Du, L. Frazier, M. LaSalle-Walsh, B. Murphy, B. Verbeck, N. Whittaker IAV videos B. Hofland sent email with link to insidehighered.com regarding recent edited streamlined video on faculty released to the public. Robert Hannu spoke on behalf of the IAV dept. and explained the current GBC policy regarding the release of class videotapes/DVD's to students. Instructors need to give the IAV department approval for a tape to be released to a student. We discussed the fact that students "assure the IAV dept. that the instructor has given consent", but that is not the correct procedure. The correct procedure is outlined below. Tape/Disc Distribution: - Classes are recorded primarily as a backup in case of a technical difficulty. - If you wish to keep an archival copy of your class session, recordings can be made on DVD. Please contact the IAV office if you would like discs made of your class. - The general rule is that NO RECORDINGS WILL BE CHECKED OUT TO STUDENTS UNLESS THERE IS A TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY OR SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED BY THE INSTRUCTOR - If a student requests a tape or disc: - The instructor must approve checking the tape out to the student - The student must check the tape out from the IAV office. Tapes will be checked out for a maximum of 1 week unless otherwise specified by the instructor - If an instructor wishes to review or save a recording of their class, they should check the tape out from the Facilitator at the end of the class period. *Please be aware that the tapes in the classroom are reused. Unless otherwise requested, tapes will be reused within three days. Some instructors use the IAV videos to post on Webcampus. Some students have complained about the video being available on Webcampus. They are concerned about the discussions in class and personal comments. There was discussion whether the students privacy was being invaded. There was discussion whether students had to sign a permission form or not before it was posted to Webcampus. An individual incident involved a student complaining about an instructor, and the video was released to administration. F. Daniels and T. Matula believed that the videos were copyrighted by the instructor and couldnt be shared without the instructors consent. Motion: T. Matula moved to that we should visit with Lynn Mahlberg and receive advice on whether we should approach legal counsel to advise us while creating a procedure for the releasing of the IAV videos, second E. Nickel, twelve aye, four no. Action plan: B. Hofland will check with Lynn Mahlberg to see if this has been brought up previously. She will also make arrangements to meet with legal counsel if Lynn advises to review a process. Bob Hannu will create a video release form for instructors. Create list of variables for prioritizing positions There was discussion on what variables should be considered while determining the prioritization of open position. It was emphasized that we need to consider positions globally and how one position impacts other programs and the rest of the college. When hiring faculty members, the general education objectives: communication, critical thinking, technology, personal wellness, personal & cultural awareness should be considered. When a department chair submits a position to be placed on the priority list, the department chair should provide the description of the position and address the variables on the list. List of variables established (in no certain order): FTE Industry demands Cultural/community needs Accreditation/safety, size limits Number of adjuncts Staffing needs (core) Equipment Fits into mission (must fill to maintain) Additional money grant Facilities Additional costs Motion: D. Freistroffer moved that this be our list of variables to consider for the prioritization of positions. The Department Chair would provide the committee would the information addressing each of the variables and the discussion in department chairs would be based on the delineation of this list, L. Uhlenkott seconds, all in favor, no oppose. Action items: Each department chair will discuss with his/her department and determine what positions should be considered for the prioritization list. When considering our staffing needs, we should also consider where we can be more efficient. We should formulate our ideas to present to administration before cuts. B. Hofland will try to get guidelines on suspending a class vs. dropping. We will make a request to administration to determine how many positions can be filled/ refilled next semester. Create list of GBC values No discussion. If position opens, does it go back on the prioritizing list or is it filled automatically? There was discussion about whether an open position was considered an action item or an information item to department chairs. An example was provided. A faculty member submitted his/her resignation for next fall. Does this position automatically get refilled or does it have to be placed on the priority list to determine that is the position that needs to be refilled? It was decided that it would depend on the position. Because of the timing with the recession and budget cuts, it was important that we consider all open positions to determine which would be most beneficial to GBC. There was further discussion whether DC makes recommendations to the Budget Task Force or are we represented with an ad hoc member. It was decided that we would request to have Sonja, Mike and Carl at our January meeting so that we could discuss these issues with them. If we do reprioritize positions, it was stated that we must be team-oriented and consider where the most good for the most students would be. We would use the list of variables. Motion: D. Freistroffer moved that when a position came open, DC would consider the list of variables and prioritize both open and new positions. When GBC determines we have the money for a faculty position (new position or a vacated position), DC will determine the order in which the positions will be refilled. T. Matula seconds, all in favor, no opposed. Because this is considered a new task for the department chair committee, this will be an action item for Faculty Senate. Additional comments: M. Swetich expressed concerns regarding Center Directors not having access to written comments on adjunct instructors. She feels those comments are valid for Campus Directors to see and is disappointed with decision made at November 12, 2010 DC meeting. Meetings next semester will be held on Fridays at 9:30a.m. Well meet Jan 14 with invited guests, Carl Diekhans, Sonja Sibert, and Mike Mcfarlane. Adjourned: 10:55 Concerns regarding the recording of interactive video (IAV) classes at GBC IAV instruction involves originating a class in one location and delivering the video and audio to remote sites where students synchronously receive the video and audio feed. Students may respond back to the originating site synchronously in both video and audio. There are typically 1 to 4 receiving sites in addition to the originating site. Currently GBC records all IAV sessions. The original purpose was strictly for backup in case technological failures occurred at an individual receiving site. With the recorded backup, if a site were to go down the rest of the class could continue at the remaining sites, and the tapes then be sent to the down site that did not receive the information live. The students at the down site could then view and listen to the recording of the class that they missed. In this original intent, the recordings were not allowed to be used for any other purpose except backup. Should GBC be recording IAV sessions at all? Concerns have always existed over the use of the IAV recordings. Some have expressed that there may be FERPA confidentiality issues even in backup use. Student images and comments are being viewed and listened to. It has always been the GBC contention that, if used as strictly intended, nothing is being shown or used in a manner that is any different than being in the original class, so no privacy or confidentiality issues exist. However, even for strict backup use there is concern about recordings being taken home by a student and then possibly rerecorded, shown to others, and similar issues such as this. (This is addressed in more detail in a separate section below.) There are control issues, such as if students should be allowed to take the recordings home, being required to view them only in a GBC facility. In some cases (particularly at certain small sites) this may not be practical or even possible. Can GBC faculty make other uses of the recordings, in addition to backup? With time, some faculty members have begun to make wider use of the IAV recordings than was originally intended. Some examples include the following: Students who have missed a class for various reasons are allowed to check out a recording. It has generally been required that there is faculty permission, but the enforcement between written and verbal permission (even via the students word) has not always been distinguished. Some faculty members like to keep recordings as a class archive (with the intended future use not necessarily being known). A faculty member might retain a recording of a class as evidence of certain student behavior during the class. In some classes where presentations are made by students, faculty members use the recordings in grading the presentation. Recordings of guest lectures are sometimes kept by faculty (again, with the intended future use not necessarily clear). Some faculty members have reused IAV recordings in Web-Campus for online classes. They are usually and essentially rebroadcasting their own lectures, but with the members of the original class being potentially in the recording. Potential for abuse of recordings Students having a recording of a class under any circumstances could potentially do any of the following: Show the recording to people who are not in the class. This would be without permission of the instructor or the other students recorded in the class. Rerecord and keep that copy without permission for some unknown future purpose. Manipulate the recording in an inappropriate manner and potentially show it in one of many possible forums, either privately or publically. Provide the recording to a GBC administrator to point out what is perceived by the student to be inappropriate conduct by the faculty member. It has also been pointed out that an administrator could attain the recordings of an instructor with the intent of looking for inability, misconduct, or reasons for disciplinary action. The legality of this is a question. What legal issues are there? Many subsequent questions are created by the above questions, considerations, and discussion. The basic questions are as follows: What rights and uses do instructors have in regard to the recordings and copyright laws? What rights and uses does GBC (administrators in particular) have in regard to the recordings? What rights do students have (such as FERPA considerations) in regard to their presence in the recordings? Summary GBC and its faculty need to have clear guidelines on the legality and use of recordings of classes, particularly when students are involved. GBC and its faculty need to have a list of exactly what uses can be made of recordings, and exactly what conditions might accompany these uses. 1)NSHE Code, Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 21 prohibits "covert video surveillance" but permits recording for legitimate academic purposes. 2)NRS 331.220 prohibits "surreptitious" electronic surveillance without the knowledge of the person being observed on any property owned or leased by the State of Nevada. 3)NRS 396.970 prohibits surreptitious electronic surveillance without the knowledge of the person being recorded unless authorized by the teacher of the laboratory or class on NSHE property. This section of law would seem to be a problem only if the recording device was operated during non-class hours or by another person other than the faculty member teaching the class. 4)NRS 200.650 prohibits electronic recording of a conversation without the consent of at least one person involved in the conversation. 5) NRS 200.690 creates a criminal penalty and a separate civil liability of a minimum of $1,000 at a rate of $100 per day for a person who violates NRS 200.690.     Distance Ed. 2010-11  PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1  DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" February 25, 2011 +,=?Ca~U u v    M N ݽ딄}ykahOJQJ^Jh9h5OJQJ^Jh hu_h*Ohk)3h*O0J hPSh*Ojh*OUhvh+ h+h;:h+hx5h+h+5>* h*O5>* h+hch]N! h+h+ h+hia} h+h'%} h+hvh*Ohlh*O5hlh'%}5%,>?v w Q R   jkGH`gd*Ogd+gdc$a$gd'%}$%mnoz{ 7$8$H$gd hd*$gd & F hd*$^`gdgd$a$gdgd+$%,/lozuu56&*&+&;&&,,,ԳԳԐԳԐm#hxh5CJOJQJ^JaJ h`hCJOJQJ^JaJ#hdh5CJOJQJ^JaJ hzS:hCJOJQJ^JaJh5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h 7fh5CJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJ hu#hCJOJQJ^JaJh9hOJQJ^J*NvTuv67! & F hd*$^`gd hd*$gd 7$8$H$gd!!!!!"&"9"O"Y""""""$$&&+&:&;&& & F hd*$^`gd d*$^gd hd*$gd&&))**,,,,,--8.9.:.K.L../,2-2Z2 455=6gdgd+ 0d*$gd,J.K.M..00+2,2-2Z2555=6r9|9::'===>>>;>??AADDDDDDDDDDDDEEEE E!Eƾƾƾƾƾƾݥݞvh?X9mHnHujhe. Uhe. hjhU h+h;: h+hhB*OJQJ^Jphh!AhlCJaJhCJaJh!AhCJaJh!Ah5CJaJh hu#hCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJ.=667h88Q99::>;;%<<?=>>;>>?u???AAAA?B 7$8$H$gdgd+ & Fdgdgd?B@BCC@DADDDDDDDDDDDDDaEbEcEdE  $HAgde. gde. gd+gd 7$8$H$gd!E"E(E4E5EMENE_E`EaEbEcEdE h+h;:hhSh?X9mHnHujhgUhgh(Hhe. 21h:p(P/ =!"#$% ^ 02 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA`D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k (No List 44 e. Header  H$66 e. Header CharCJaJ4 @4 e. Footer  H$6!6 e. Footer CharCJaJH2H e. Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJNAN e. Balloon Text CharCJOJQJ^JaJ6U@Q6 *O0 Hyperlink >*B*phPK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] d= \ }}},!EdE#&*-!&=6?BdE$%'()+,Md=X!9;Ohz!8@0(  B S  ?2 9 c j o w  V ] ~ BJ,4Y`""$$ &&&"&-&6&<<<<<<<<<<<<<=!=4=`=b=e=+,=Ca<<<<<<<<<<<<=!=`=e=+,=Ca<e=Ig+ǮK~Ϛ8^8`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo ^ `OJQJo(hH ^ `OJQJo(hHx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHoH^H`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`o(. ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.~Ig+n0                 10. e. c,S+{[]N!'#d'(1y+;6 8O8?X9;:G$:*N*OWZYty|'%}ia}vx(HsDR(Pl0gk2e=YS2=p`H<<@d=X@UnknownG* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial5. *aTahoma7.{ @Calibri?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math"1h 3n 3n24d<<2QHX ?v2!xxMinutes October 5, 2007GBCGBC  Oh+'0  < H T `lt|Minutes October 5, 2007GBC Normal.dotmGBC2Microsoft Office Word@F#@Z=@Z=@Z= 3՜.+,D՜.+,T hp  Ĵýn< Minutes October 5, 2007 Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSAae7http://www.gbcnv.edu/distance/IAV_Faculty_Handbook.pdf  !"#$%&'()*+,-.0123456789:;<=>?@ACDEFGHIKLMNOPQTRoot Entry F@w=V1Table/$WordDocument4\SummaryInformation(BDocumentSummaryInformation8JCompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q